MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158575124 · doi:10.1177/0883073811408312

The Black Box of Perinatal Ischemic Stroke Pathogenesis

2011· review· en· W2158575124 on OpenAlexaff
Aleksandra Mineyko, Adam Kirton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Neurology · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institutes of HealthStroke Association
KeywordsMedicineEpidemiologyCausationStroke (engine)Intensive care medicineNeuroimagingBioinformaticsPsychiatryPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An improved understanding of perinatal stroke epidemiology, classification, neuroimaging, and outcomes has emerged in recent years. Despite this, little is known regarding the pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for most cases. A multitude of possible associations and putative risk factors have been reported, but most lack definitive empirical evidence supporting primary causation. These include obstetrical and maternal factors, perinatal conditions, infectious diseases, prothrombotic abnormalities, cardiac disorders, medications, and many others. The bulk of evidence is weak, dominated by case reports and retrospective case series. Findings from the small number of case-control and cohort studies that exist are limited by heterogeneous populations and methodologies. The single largest barrier to ultimately understanding and potentially improving outcomes from this common and disabling condition is the lack of comprehensive, fully powered risk factor studies required to definitively describe perinatal stroke pathogenesis. This review summarizes current evidence and suggests future directions for research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations75
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child NeurologySame topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsFrench-language works237,207